Re: riscv32 EXT4 splat, 6.8 regression?

From: "Björn Töpel" <bjorn@kernel.org>
To: Nam Cao <namcao@linutronix.de>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>,
	"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>,
	Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>,
	Alexandre Ghiti <alex@ghiti.fr>
Subject: Re: riscv32 EXT4 splat, 6.8 regression?
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:56:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87v84h2tee.fsf@all.your.base.are.belong.to.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240416173030.257f0807@namcao>

Nam Cao <namcao@linutronix.de> writes:

> Fixed version:
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/mm/init.c b/arch/riscv/mm/init.c
> index fa34cf55037b..af4192bc51d0 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/mm/init.c
> @@ -245,6 +245,7 @@ static void __init setup_bootmem(void)
>  	 * be done as soon as the kernel mapping base address is determined.
>  	 */
>  	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_64BIT)) {
> +		memblock_reserve(__pa(-PAGE_SIZE), PAGE_SIZE);
>  		max_mapped_addr = __pa(~(ulong)0);
>  		if (max_mapped_addr == (phys_ram_end - 1))
>  			memblock_set_current_limit(max_mapped_addr - 4096);

Nice!

Can't we get rid of the if-statement, and max_mapped_address as well?

Björn

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv